I am not sure we will be able to actually have an intellectual discourse. I wasn’t kidding when I said your point of view is alien to me.
Bulverism is a liberal concept, a way of attacking someone who disagrees with you because they were wrong to “assume” you were wrong, rather than that they disagree with you for reasons that seem sufficient to them. Your statements are what I was responding to, not some assumption that you were wrong.
Your bulverism stance is a defense mechanism that prevents you from needing to examine the issues being raised in discussion.
Any time someone wants to void the contributions and worthiness of 50% of the human race, they have a problem. So many scientific discoveries, so many other contributions ignored because of the few vocal liberal nuts who have been allowed to destroy the social fabric of our Nation.
Lots of women are silly and greedy...lots of men too..its called human nature. McCabe’s ladies are fools and proud of it. It’s fine to despise them however it is logical fallacy to suggest that they are the definition of what women are or are capable of.
Your responses lead me to believe you had already checked out. If you're indeed willing to debate, mores the better!
Your statements are what I was responding to, not some assumption that you were wrong.
Nonsense. I directly referred to your "You must have faced..." statement. That comment is a total non-sequitur except as a proposition speculating on how I "feel" the way I do. I assure you, "feeling" has nothing to do with it as you will see by my responses to your other posts.
Your bulverism stance is a defense mechanism that prevents you from needing to examine the issues being raised in discussion.
You've got it backwards. I have said nothing about "why" you think as you do (something you don't seem to be able to argue without), and thus can not be guilty of Bulverism.
Any time someone wants to void the contributions and worthiness of 50% of the human race, they have a problem.
So your stance is "a billion chinamen can't be wrong?" Please elaborate.
Further, I asked you to demonstrate your thesis which you have steadfastly refused to do in several exchanges. I am prepared to back up my thesis, but see no reason to do so until you move beyond the gratuitous assertion stage and provide some real evidence.
Lots of women are silly and greedy...lots of men too..its called human nature.
If you are willing to acknowledge "human nature," by what mechanism do you deny the human nature of men and women must be the same in character and magnitude? You can't have it both ways.